Oh look, Congress and the Executive Branch are in crisis mode again, this time because of the debt ceiling.  Even though the debt ceiling was breached in January, extraordinary measures have been used to pay the country’s bills. Well, now it looks like the country may default in early June.  This would be devastating to the economy.  Interest rates will go up which will mean a tighter economy and interest payments on the national debt will skyrocket.  The economy continues to struggle as evidenced by the anemic 1.1 percent economic growth in the first quarter of 2023.  And, some analysts are predicting that country will be in recession by the end of the year.  The House passed the Limit, Save, Grow Act of 2023. This legislation raises the debt ceiling by $1.5 trillion, or suspends it until March 31, 2024, whichever comes first. On discretionary spending, it brings the federal budget back to adopted levels for fiscal year 2022, or about $130 billion in cuts. The Limit, Save, Grow Act also takes necessary steps such as repealing the $80 billion in funding for the IRS authorized through the Inflation Reduction Act in August 2022. Further it puts a halt to President Biden’s $400 billion student loan forgiveness plan. A key part of the plan eliminates several green energy tax credits, which the Goldman Sachs Group estimates could save taxpayers as much as $1.2 trillion. Overall, the Limit, Save, Grow Act is estimated to reduce federal outlays by $4.5 trillion over 10 years by focusing on cutting reckless spending rather than raising taxes. Defaulting on the debt is unacceptable.
 
Profile in Courage – Governor Phil Blatt
 
In the modern, hyper-polarized world, it’s tempting for governors and state policymakers to wage culture wars, urge the banning of lifesaving products, and even demonize tamales. Fortunately, contemporary leaders can look back at the courageous actions of their predecessors for valuable lessons on how to govern. One “gem” of a statesman was “Gem State” (Idaho) Governor Phil Batt whose steadfast fiscal conservatism and bipartisan approach to policy led to growth and prosperity. The recently passed Gov. Batt always came into negotiations and press conferences armed with a joke and friendly candor and was ready to do the right thing even when it wasn’t politically expedient. For being a shining example of good governance and peeling back spending waste, Phil Batt was a Profile in Courage.
 
Batt’s exemplary record of service started at an early age when he enlisted in the Air Force during WWII and worked as a clerk discharging veterans. After the war, he completed his chemical engineering studies at the University of Idaho and even led a dance band to make his studies slightly more bearable. The future governor started his career farming onions and learned a thing or two about government waste along the way.  Starting in the post-war period, agribusinesses were growing their operations with the help of lavish federal subsidies. While Batt wanted to expand his farming ventures, he wasn’t willing to do so by taking taxpayers’ hard-earned dollars. Former U.S. Department of Agriculture income supports administrator Trent Clark noted that, “Batt’s farming business consistently qualified for federal subsidies rewarding conservation measures. Batt always returned the checks, which totaled hundreds of thousands of dollars.” As a farmer in a state where most land is owned by the federal government, Batt was also well-aware of the constant struggle between cattle ranchers and conservationists. He knew that a less interventionist, and less heavy-handed approach would be better for everyone and lead to fewer tensions in his beloved state. Armed with an anti-waste agenda and a vision of friendlier, more constructive politics, Batt tried his hand at higher office. After serving in the State House and Senate from 1965 through 1979 and serving as Lieutenant Governor from 1979 to 1983, Batt launched his bid for governor. While his first campaign in 1982 was unsuccessful, he finally prevailed in the 1994 election and became Idaho’s first GOP governor in 28 years. Batt’s tenure marked a tumultuous time in national politics. Then-President Clinton and the Republican Congress were fumbling toward a fiscal surplus, but it would take a government shutdown and plenty of ill-will to get there. Batt decided to forge a different approach in his state, working closely with the Democratic opposition to get things done. He was good friends with former Democratic Gov. Cecil Andrus and would often seek his advice during their numerous golf outings. When Batt led an initiative to control Medicaid spending, he solicited input from Republicans and Democrats as well as healthcare workers who had unique insight into the government insurance program. The result was a plan that would save the state $18.3 million over five years by implementing co-payments, funding reallocations, and tackling wasteful payments to non-performing providers. Batt also managed to implement a two percent across-the-board spending reduction in response to a steep drop in tax revenue following a decline in the computer chip market.
 
The Governor also worked hard to engender respect among the state’s residents. He played a pivotal role in the creation of the Idaho Human Rights Commission to protect marginalized groups against discrimination. He was also a consistent champion of farmworkers injured on the job, and successfully pushed for the even application of workers’ compensation to field hands. As Idaho Secretary of State Ben Ysursa recounts, Batt “stuck to his principles, and I think that’s the key. You set your feet in the ground and do what’s right, regardless of the consequences. That’s what Phil did, and he was the model for all of us.” And, for fighting the good fight with a smile on his face, Phil Batt was a Profile in Courage.
 
Swift Ticketing Problems
 
Music fans across the nation are still reeling in the aftermath of the Taylor Swift ticketing tumult. The difficulty in securing tickets to the artist’s current “Eras Tour” led to widespread outrage. Executives from Ticketmaster’s parent company, Live Nation Entertainment, were questioned by lawmakers across the country. The ticketing industry more generally, has come under increased scrutiny over the past few months. Current law in most states does allow artists and venues to prohibit re-sale of their tickets. This means they can essentially ban any further transactions. The person who buys the ticket first has to be the one who uses it. This is one way to avoid another headache on the same scale as the Taylor Swift tour. Swift vastly underpriced her tickets for her most recent tour. With huge demand, many saw an opportunity to buy tickets at these artificially low prices – even though they never intended to use them – and flip them for an enormous profit on a secondary market. This flooded the ticket sites and created the disaster everyone saw last year. Curiously, a number of lawmakers want to implement changes that would incentivize scalping and price gouging in secondary markets. Unfortunately, this misunderstands the very nature of ticket sales. Lawmakers seeking to bar artists, venues, and ticketing companies from limiting resale markets are operating under an outdated theory of ticketing. They come at the issue as if a ticket sale is a straightforward purchase of property. Walking into a thrift shop and getting a vintage hoodie, that hoodie is the buyer’s property now and he or she can keep it, sell it, or use it however he or she sees fit for as long as desired. This is how lawmakers are attempting to understand ticketing.
However, this is simply not analogous. In fact, policymakers need not look too far to see a much better analogy for concert ticketing. When someone purchases an airline ticket, that ticket is non-transferable. It is associated with the buyer’s name and identification. It does not entitle the person to fly on that airplane whenever they wish and there is a built-in agreement on several limitations once the purchase is complete. That sale is more of a rental or license rather than a purchase of physical property.
 
There is no reason that concert or sports ticketing cannot be the same. In fact, there’s a degree to which they already are. Ticketholders are getting access to a venue for one night only to see a specific event. They tacitly agree to restrictions on their conduct and what they can or cannot bring into the arena. The ticket in no way entitles them to perpetual access to said venue.  Allowing artists, venues, or ticketers to ban resale markets is not radical or restrictive. It is actually quite natural, given the nature of ticket sales more broadly. It simply gives these actors in the system the option to take action if they think it would help streamline their ticket sales or make the process more efficient.
 
If an artist like Swift had communicated to Ticketmaster that she did not want a resale market, her tour would have been much less of a magnet for these opportunists. She would have been able to sell her tickets to her diehard fans and there would have been no incentive for anyone to try and flip tickets for gain, because the possibility would not exist. This allows artists, sports teams and leagues, and other event hosts to offer their experiences to fans for more affordable prices, without having to hike prices or tack on extra fees to dissuade this type of behavior.  The market has the tools to do exactly what one should expect it to do after an incident like Swift’s Eras Tour. It can innovate and implement changes to fix the problems that caused it in the first place. Thinking the response to the Eras debacle should be to restrict artist flexibility on resale markets misses the point entirely. Instead of tightening the screws, lawmakers should instead be applauding this option or even encouraging it. An outdated vision of ticket sales as physical property would severely inhibit these benefits from being passed on.

BLOGS:
   
Monday: Profile in Courage: Governor Phil Batt
 
Tuesday: Climate Charter on Ballot in El Paso would lead to government takeover of utility, increase taxes
   
Wednesday: Appeals court rules FCC doesn’t have to vote on Standard General merger
   
Thursday: Government Watchdog Group Urges Congress to Oppose EARN IT Act
 
Friday: Texas lawmakers look to use $5 billion in tax dollars to create redundant broadband fund
 
MEDIA:
 
May 1,2023:  WBFF Fox45 (Baltimore, Md.) interviewed me about education spending in Maryland and Baltimore.
 
May 2, 2023:  RealClear Markets ran TPA’s op-ed, “Ticketmaster Was Not the Taylor Swift Tour Problem.”
 
May 2, 2023: My Journal Courier (Jacksonville Illin.) ran TPA’s op-ed, “Postal service ‘reform’ failing taxpayers and consumers.”
 
May 2, 2023: Patrick Hedger was quoted in a story in DailyMail.com titled, “Joe Biden BLOWS more than $50 billion on top consulting firms - three times more than Trump's now-axed border wall - and YOU are paying for it!”
 
May 2, 2023:  Catalyst ran TPA’s op-ed, “Obamacare Court Ruling a Victory for Affordability and Choice.”
 
May 2, 2023: The Reagan-Udall Foundation ran TPA’s op-ed, “Biden’s Cancer Moonshot will fail without reform of the FDA - The Center Square.”
 
May 2, 2023:  WBFF Fox45 (Baltimore, Md.) quoted TPA in their story, “Taxpayer advocate criticizes City School's money management after taxicab controversy.”
 
May 3, 2023:  The American Spectator ran TPA’s op-ed, “Crumbling Post Offices Pose Problems and Opportunities for USPS.”
 
May 4, 2023:  I appeared on WBOB 600 AM (Jacksonville, Fla.) to talk about the economy and the debt ceiling.
 
May 4, 2023:  National Review ran TPA’s op-ed, “Digital Antitrust Poses a Security Hazard.”
 
May 4, 2023:  WBFF Fox45 (Baltimore, Md.) interviewed me about legislation that would prevent members of Congress from trading stocks.
 
May 4, 2023: Issues & Insights ran TPA’s op-ed, “States And Localities Must Redesign Road Rules.”
 
May 4, 2023: Reason ran TPA’s op-ed, “These Senators Want the Federal Government To Verify Your Age Online.”
 
May 5, 2023: Townhall.com ran TPA’s op-ed, “Debt Default Would Make the National Debt Worse.”

 Have a great weekend!